Five people including a seven-year-old girl have died while trying to cross the Channel in a small boat
The BBC witnessed people scrambling onto the boat, as well as police efforts to stop them
The incident comes as the UK's parliament passed the PM's flagship Rwanda bill after months of wrangling
It will see some asylum seekers sent to the east-central African country to have their claims processed
The bill designates Rwanda a safe country but the plan is fiercely criticised by opposition and rights groups
Rishi Sunak says today's deaths serve as a reminder of why he wants to deter people smugglers
Image source, BBC ParliamentMPs have divided to vote on the government motion to reject the Lords' amendment, requiring an independent monitory committee to certify the Rwanda treaty.
"Division, clear the lobby." the deputy speaker calls.
The result is expected at 17:30.
We'll catch you up with some of those last lines before the break shortly.
Dame Diana Johnson, chair of Home Affairs Committee, says the House of Lords "absolutely has the right to act as a revising chamber and to give their advice to this chamber".
She adds that rather than claiming that Rwanda is safe for ever more," this is a sensible and measured amendment to deal with the facts and for allowing them to when they changed."
Johnson adds: "With the prime minister insisting the flights will begin in 10 to 12 weeks, the Lords amendment provides a safe guard ensuring everyone sent to Rwanda will be protected by the implemented treaty provision."
Tory MP Tim Loughton, who sits on the Home Affairs Select Committee, says it's time to get the legislation passed and calls for the amendments to be voted down.
He says there have been months for people to raise their concerns and the government has given assurances in response, particularly on the issue of Afghans.
Loughton says Rwanda is safe and accused courts which declared otherwise of relying on a limited snapshot of evidence.
He ends by saying that Labour has not come up with any alternative solutions and people "will come in their droves" if the party wins the election.
Earlier today, he told the BBC he had brought a sleeping bag to the Commons in anticipation of a long night of voting.
Continuing for the SNP, Thewliss notes the bill asserts that Rwanda is safe, and says there will be no means of declaring Rwanda unsafe.
She says it is "not logical" to declare it safe forever without the ability to declare otherwise "should something happen".
Image source, Parliament TVThe government and opposition representatives in the House of Commons are done with their statements now.
The debate continues with the SNP's Alison Thewliss, who says she wishes the bill has never been brought to the House.
She says that amendments that the Lords have tabled are "perfectly legitimate".
Thewliss adds that she would support "any mechanism we can use to stop this bill".
Her SNP colleague Patrick Grady adds that the party will take "every single opportunity to express their opposition to this outrageous plan."
Thewliss adds: "The lack of enthusiasm from Tory Lords...might be because many of them didn't show up to vote last week.
"This not in the Conservative Party manifesto, they have no mandate for the Rwanda plan, which will see that we engage in state sponsored people trafficking."
Kinnock is still making his argument in the Commons and is criticising the government's past record on assisting Afghans seeking refuge in Pakistan, which he describes as a disgrace and betrayal of British values.
He says failure to pass the Afghan amendment tonight will harm the ability of the British Armed Forces to recruit local allies in future conflicts, and points to unease among some senior figures in the military.
Kinnock concludes by urging support for the amendments and attacking the government for showing a "basic level of respect and decency" for military allies.
The prime minister and his government are "not fit to govern", he ends by saying.
Image source, UK ParliamentKinnock continues for Labour, and takes aim at the government's opposition to an amendment from the Lords which would stop Afghans who assisted British forces from being removed to Rwanda.
"It really is shameful that we're still debating what should be a given," he says, adding "we owe a debt of gratitude to the Afghans who stood shoulder to shoulder with our troops."
He says the government is seeking to "trash" the UK's reputation as a country that "honours its debts", adding: "What a disgrace, ministers should hang their heads in shame."
The government has deployed "spurious" argument to defend their position, he claims, and he insists it is not the case that there are safe and legal routes in place for Afghans to seek asylum in the UK.
He says court documents show that in November 2022 that the prime minister issued instructions to halt flights from Pakistan for an entire year for Afghans who had already been granted resettlement rights in the UK, and only restarted them when the Pakistani government threatened to send people back to Afghanistan.
Labour MP Imran Hussain asks whether setting out in UK law that Rwanda is a safe country would it mean it is really safe.
He warns it "sets a very serious and dangerous precedent" when dealing with other potentially unsafe countries in the future.
Kinnock agrees with Hussain, adding that the Supreme Court has ruled Rwanda is not a safe country.
"And yet we are being asked to legislate," he adds. "We have such an important point of principle to choose to legislate the opposite."
Continuing, Kinnock says the plan is shockingly unaffordable and will puts tens of thousands of asylum seekers who can't be sent to Rwanda because of lack of capacity there in a "perma-backlog".
He says the government described the plan as emergency legislation, but accuses the ministers of stringing out the legislative process for "grubby political capital".
He calls the 10-12 week delay announced by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak this morning as "a bit of a stretch".
Image source, ReutersThe first flight was scheduled to go to Rwanda in June 2022, but was cancelled after legal challenges
Shadow minister for the Home Office Stephen Kinnock calls the bill a "con" and a "sham", saying the plan is "unworkable" and "unaffordable".
He says Labour would repurpose the money for a cross-border police unit and security partnership to tackle criminal gangs "and restore order to our border", and that his party would also create a new returns and enforcement unit to "remove people from the country who have no right to be here".
He says there has been a collapse in the number of failed asylum seekers being returned, saying his party would end what he describes as border "chaos".
Kinnock also says the government's plan would only get a "few symbolic flights off the ground" ahead of an election, which he calls "tokenism and posturing of the worst sort".
Labour's Stella Creasy brings up the case of her constituent, a British citizen originally from Afghanistan who served with the UK armed forces for 15 years.
She says his children and wife have not been able to join him, adding that he was also not eligible for the settlement scheme because he was a British citizen.
She then asks why this amendment matters.
"There is already existing legislation, including but not limited to the Illegal Migration Act. This government recognises the commitment and responsibility that comes with combat veterans whether our own or served alongside us," Tomlinson answers.
Tomlinson says the government values the contribution of Afghans who supported international forces during the war, and says there are legal routes for them to come to the UK.
He says the government has made a clear commitment that it will not send anyone to Rwanda if credible evidence is found that they worked with international forces through the Afghan-specific scheme, which is already in place.
Image source, Getty ImagesKigali, the capital of Rwanda
Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader Liz Saville Roberts asks why Rwandans are excluded from being returned to Rwanda if the country is "truly safe", and asks why the government "refuses to accept the need to prove the safety of Rwanda as a requirement".
Tomlinson says the "proof of the safety" is the treaty struck between the UK and Rwanda, which he says is binding and addresses the Supreme Court's concerns of refoulment.
Tomlinson reminds MPs that there are procedures already in place under the UK's treaty with Rwanda to monitor the safety of the country for those are relocated there.
He says: "We have already established the right mechanisms. The government will respond as necessary if the situation arrives, including any primary legislation it requires."
"I can confirm that last Friday, the Rwandan parliament passed domestic legislation to implement their new asylum system," he adds.
Tomlinson adds: "This is a migration and economic development partnership" and thanks the government of Rwanda for its efforts to implement the treaty and partnership.
Image source, BBC ParliamentDUP MP Jim Shannon says exempting people from the scheme who can show they assisted British forces in Afghanistan represents a simple way out of the deadlock.
He describes the back and forth between the Commons and Lords as being not a democratic exercise, but a democratic embarrassment.
Tomlinson says he will address the Afghanistan amendment in detail soon, but assures him reassurances have been provided by the government.
The minister for illegal migration, Michael Tomlinson is speaking for the government.
He says it is "disappointing that we're back here again" considering amendments from the Lords.
He says the Lords is entitled to ask the Commons to think again, but he says "we did think again and again", with the Commons now voting for the third time in the ping pong process.
"We need to bring the process to a conclusion," he says, claiming the Labour Party has voted against measures to tackle illegal migration 134 times.
"Enough is enough. We must get on with it," he says.
The moment we've been building up to has arrived. The Safety of Rwanda Bill will now be debated in the House of Commons.
As a reminder, there are two Lords amendments up for consideration by MPs.
You can watch the debate live by clicking the play button at the top of this page.
Harry Farley
Political correspondent
How many asylum seekers will be deported to Rwanda?
“There are a series of known unknowns.”
That was how a Home Office source put it to me when we spoke recently. In other words there are a number of things that still aren’t clear about the Rwanda policy and how it will work. But the government is aware of the issues that may come up.
One of the questions that is not clear is how many asylum seekers will be deported to Rwanda. The government say the number is uncapped.
The latest figures from this morning show there are 51,926 people whose cases can only be dealt with by removal from the UK.
But the government is not clear how many will be on the initial flights – or at least they haven’t said yet.
As we wait for the House of Commons to get to the Rwanda bill, let's look back to the prime minister's statement this morning.
At around 10:30 BST this morning Rishi Sunak gave a televised news conference setting out his determination to get the Rwanda bill passed into law.
If you missed it, watch the prime minster's full statement in the video below.
Watch: Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's full statement on the Rwanda bill
Today is crunch time for the government’s Rwanda bill. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is trying to get it over the finish line, but the idea for the legislation began under former Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Here’s a look at the key dates:
14 April 2022 Boris Johnson announces plans that could send people arriving illegally to the UK to Rwanda.
14 June 2022 The first flight due to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda was cancelled minutes before take-off after an intervention from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It followed a ruling from the UK’s Supreme Court that it could go ahead.
19 December 2022 The UK’s High Court says the government's plan to deport migrants to Rwanda is lawful and does not breach the UN's Refugee Convention or human rights laws. However, judges order the reconsideration of cases for eight asylum seekers.
29 June 2023 The UK’s Court of Appeal ruled government plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda are unlawful as there is a risk asylum seekers may be sent to their home country.
15 November 2023 The Supreme Court rules that the government's scheme to send asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful.
12 December 2023 The House of Commons voted 313-269 to approve the The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, formulated in response to the Supreme Court ruling.
18 January - 12 March 2024 The House of Lords considers the bill and suggests a number of amendments.
Today, 22 April 2024 The bill has gone back-and-forth between the Commons and Lords. There are two outstanding Lords amendments to be considered today. They are:
Further time has been set aside on 23 April if necessary.